
I think it would be better to just define a new typeclass with some added
constraints/documentation to clarify what the defaults mean in hasql. It
may end up being a copy of the Default class but I'd still prefer that.
Cheers,
Adam
On Thu, 10 May 2018 at 19:08 Viktor Dukhovni
On May 10, 2018, at 12:56 PM, Adam Bergmark
wrote: I agree that you should avoid Data.Default, but there is still value in keeping the package up to date since it is well-used. I would appreciate it being actively maintained.
I would however find it in bad taste to do a take over that immediately marks the package as deprecated...
I use Hasql, and Hasql makes extensive use of Default to implement default encoders for various data types and tuples thereof. Is there a better design that the author of Hasql should be using instead?
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/hasql-1.1.1/docs/Hasql-Encoders.html#t:V...
-- Viktor.
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to: http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.